On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 12:59:30PM +0100, Mehdi Rashidi wrote:
> > I am trying to analyze the OVS as an option for porting it to our
> devices.
> > Reading the porting document has risen some question for me.
> > Q: Say
Is this right if I say dpif gives an abstracted underlying datapath
(hardware) for ofproto?
Mehdi
___
discuss mailing list
discuss@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 11:09 PM, Mehdi Rashidi wrote:
> I read the document couple of times but I found it quit vague maybe
> because of lack of knowledge.
> My confusion is that whether all those components (
>
> ofproto-dpif, dpif, dpif provider) are needed all together if I
e the document and you emphasized in your answer if I
don't want to use userspace switch I have two choices: write "ofproto
provider" or "dpif provider" so does it mean that "ofproto" either uses
"ofproto provider" or "dpif provider"?
Thanks
Hello everybody,
I am totally new to the OVS and OpenFlow and trying to understand them
deeply as I am working on a project which aims to make non-compliant
OpenFlow devices compatible with OpenFlow. i.e. to be controlled by
OpenFlow controller.
I am trying to analyze the OVS as an option for por
